Another "I told you so " according to DEMOCRAT State Senator Joe Simitian of California. Although he is a fan of HSR "done right", he is one of four California state senators to have voted against spending $100 billion on a bullet train from San Fran to L.A. In 2008 California voters approved an almost $10 billion bond issue to build a $33 billion HSR project. The original estimate of 44 million riders per year has been radically revised downward. Now it is estimated to cost $100 billion. According to Jerry Brown, it will only cost $68.5 billion. The savings will come from taking away the "bullet" by not building the special high speed roadbed. Rotflmao. God Bless Jerry. I can't make this stuff up. Nobody takes his fiscal estimates seriously. His projection in May of a $15.7 budget deficit is 70 % higher than what his January estimate was.
Obama and the Feds have come up with $3.3 billion for this project. Simitian says it is 5 % of the cost "if the project stays on budget". Who thinks that will ever happen ? He notes further that the $3.3 billion plus $ 2.7 from the state are supposed to finance a 130 mile stretch through the Central Valley. A train from and to NOWHERE. It will NOT be high speed , will not be electrified and there is no private funding or dedicated funding source of any kind. And the 2008 ballot measure authorizing the bonds specifically prohibited state operating subsidies. Smarter than their governor, 59% of California voters who originally voted "Yes" would now vote "No" on this project.
In contrast to "Dum Dum Brown", who failed to recognize what voters clearly see ( that the Federal $3.3 billion was designed to let California commit itself to much bigger future spending ) the Governors of Wisconsin, Ohio, Florida and arguably New Jersey dodged and rejected this Federal "honeypot". Scott Walker rejected $810 million for a 78 mile HSR project parallel to I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee. Less than 1 1/2 hours by car or bus. In Ohio, Kasich rejected $400 million for a rail line traveling at automobile speed between Cleveland and Cincinatti. The best one was what Rick Scott rejected in Florida: $2.4 billion for 90 miles of HSR between Tampa and Orlando. A completely unknown number of hypothetical travelers were supposed to park their cars in Tampa, take the train and then rent another car in Orlando. A 90 mile trip by car that can be covered in 75 minutes ! Obviously this was some sort of "faith based" transportation policy lol. What Christie did in N.J. was somewhat different. What he rejected was not a HSR project. However he wisely refused to commit the N.J. taxpayers to an open-ended rail tunnel project with no protection against cost overruns and nebulous contributions from NYC and N.Y. State.
Returning to California, "Dum Dum" Brwon has not budgeted a nickel to cover the inevitable environmental litigation. Califonia is sown thicker than any other state with environmental laws and regulations and of course has more than its share of lawyers. A HSR project without anything resembling an EIS is an open invitation to decades of litigation.
All this posted by a train buff who likes train travel and prefers it to flying. But as I have posted, why would anyone take a train when they can drive to the same place just as cheaply, maybe cheaper. Or take a train from San Fran to L.A. when flying is faster and cheaper. Before Eagle says that my "ideology" is out of control , what does he say to Senator Simitian and his fellow Dems who object to this type of boondoggling ?



Reply With Quote
Bookmarks